Radeon 890M vs 680M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 680M and Radeon 890M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Radeon 680M
2023
50 Watt
7.46

890M outperforms 680M by a whopping 154% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking515269
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency11.81100.00
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025)
GPU code nameRembrandt+Strix Point
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 January 2023 (2 years ago)15 July 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores7681024
Core clock speed2000 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed2200 MHz2900 MHz
Number of transistors13,100 million34,000 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate105.6185.6
Floating-point processing power3.379 TFLOPS5.939 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs4864
Ray Tracing Cores1216

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memory++

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsPortable Device DependentPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.76.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.31.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Radeon 680M 7.46
Radeon 890M 18.95
+154%

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Radeon 680M 3334
Radeon 890M 8465
+154%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Radeon 680M 10371
Radeon 890M 16023
+54.5%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Radeon 680M 34600
Radeon 890M 46360
+34%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Radeon 680M 6865
Radeon 890M 9573
+39.4%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Radeon 680M 43225
Radeon 890M 54704
+26.6%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Radeon 680M 2303
Radeon 890M 3533
+53.4%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD37
−16.2%
43
+16.2%
1440p17
−5.9%
18
+5.9%
4K11
−145%
27−30
+145%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−185%
117
+185%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
−15.8%
40−45
+15.8%
Hogwarts Legacy 34
−26.5%
43
+26.5%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−140%
80−85
+140%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−122%
91
+122%
Cyberpunk 2077 28
−57.1%
40−45
+57.1%
Far Cry 5 38
−52.6%
58
+52.6%
Fortnite 45−50
−118%
100−110
+118%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−131%
80−85
+131%
Forza Horizon 5 52
−26.9%
65−70
+26.9%
Hogwarts Legacy 22
−68.2%
37
+68.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−172%
75−80
+172%
Valorant 80−85
−82.9%
150−160
+82.9%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−140%
80−85
+140%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−7.3%
44
+7.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
−88.2%
230−240
+88.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
−110%
40−45
+110%
Dota 2 71
−154%
180−190
+154%
Far Cry 5 35
−51.4%
53
+51.4%
Fortnite 45−50
−118%
100−110
+118%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−131%
80−85
+131%
Forza Horizon 5 46
−43.5%
65−70
+43.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
−52.8%
55
+52.8%
Hogwarts Legacy 20
−25%
25
+25%
Metro Exodus 23
−95.7%
45−50
+95.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−172%
75−80
+172%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40
−30%
52
+30%
Valorant 80−85
−82.9%
150−160
+82.9%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−140%
80−85
+140%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
−144%
40−45
+144%
Dota 2 61
−146%
150−160
+146%
Far Cry 5 33
−51.5%
50
+51.5%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−131%
80−85
+131%
Hogwarts Legacy 14
−35.7%
19
+35.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−172%
75−80
+172%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
−37.5%
33
+37.5%
Valorant 146
−2.7%
150−160
+2.7%
Fortnite 45−50
−118%
100−110
+118%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−214%
40−45
+214%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
−139%
140−150
+139%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
−112%
35−40
+112%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−238%
27−30
+238%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−312%
170−180
+312%
Valorant 90−95
−107%
180−190
+107%
Battlefield 5 18−20
−222%
55−60
+222%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
−100%
20−22
+100%
Far Cry 5 21
−119%
45−50
+119%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−174%
50−55
+174%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
−156%
21−24
+156%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
−88.2%
30−35
+88.2%
Fortnite 16−18
−182%
45−50
+182%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
−1800%
18−20
+1800%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
−100%
35−40
+100%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
−333%
12−14
+333%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−467%
16−18
+467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
−131%
30−33
+131%
Valorant 40−45
−181%
110−120
+181%
Battlefield 5 9−10
−244%
30−35
+244%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
−1800%
18−20
+1800%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
−100%
8−9
+100%
Dota 2 18
−150%
45−50
+150%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−144%
21−24
+144%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−177%
35−40
+177%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
−333%
12−14
+333%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−163%
21−24
+163%
Fortnite 8−9
−175%
21−24
+175%

This is how Radeon 680M and Radeon 890M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 890M is 16% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 890M is 6% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 890M is 145% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 890M is 1800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Radeon 890M surpassed Radeon 680M in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.46 18.95
Recency 3 January 2023 15 July 2024
Chip lithography 6 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 890M has a 154% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 890M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 680M in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon 680M
Radeon 680M
AMD Radeon 890M
Radeon 890M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2
1024 votes

Rate Radeon 680M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2
153 votes

Rate Radeon 890M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon 680M or Radeon 890M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.